|
|
 |
Your
Ad Here!
Send Email to: publisher@newmusicon.org |
|
|
|
Your
Ad Here!
Send Email to: publisher@newmusicon.org |
CONTENTSIN THIS ISSUE ..., 3 An Interview with George Walker, Duffie, 5 LEGATO NOTES LIVE EVENTS
Scelsi:
“All of the Above” Pehrson, 15 DOTTED NOTES
from… SPEAKING OUT RECORDINGS CDS
IN BRIEF & RECENT RELEASES THE
PUZZLE CORNER: COMPOSER INDEX, 26 BULLETIN BOARD, 27 WEB SUPPLEMENTGala AnnouncementFestivalDresdener Tage des Zeitgenössisches Musik
|
LOUDER, LOUDER!by BLC ©2004 [We begin what we hope will be a usefully provocative series on the problems of hearing loss and musical performance, as well as the growing issue of amplification of theatrical performance, two subjects that are often diametrically opposed to each other.] It has always appeared odd to me that the louder is a performance of music—whether it be a rock concert, a brash musical or a hootenanny —the happier are the looks on the faces of the younger set as they leave the theater or band shell. What makes them smile, I wonder? Is it the sheer delight of seeing the older folks hold their ears, the vibrations that loud music sets off, or their belief that loud is simply good (like greed, violence or images that hit the eye like a "bigga" pizza pie)? After all, I know that older folks need amplification a lot more than teenagers. And yet the reverse seems to be true and it’s the more mature attendees that complain about the rush to amplify, amplify, amplify. In a recent issue of NewMusicBox.org, Frank Oteri, interviewed composer Tod Machover, who mentioned the controversy begun at the New York State Theater. But now, he said, the "dirty little secret" is that already 20 opera houses have installed amplification systems. Now I know both of these gentlemen and I can’t call them whippersnappers, but they are surely not old fellows with severe hearing problems just yet. When that time comes, attitudes tend to change. Until then, amplification seems to bother many opera singers, instrumentalists, and conductors, not to mention critics, music scholars and just plain music lovers. The issue is not just an American one, by any means. British singer John Tomlinson, speaking to members of the Royal Philharmonic Society, pointed out that "there are instances of young, unspoiled voices being miked, with great popular success, and then being subsequently ruined when singing the same role and trying to have the same success in unamplified circumstances." Andrea Bocelli, whose career has pretty much been made on TV, says he hates amplification. Recently Placido Domingo, singer and director of the Washington Opera, spoke out vociferously on the subject. "I am really very serious about not having amplification in opera. Opera has to be real—you must hear the real voices of the singers." The New York Times appears to be leading the charge against amplification, and critics, in general, have been railing against it.
Well, certainly Mr. Tomlinson makes a good case for dispensing with amplification, and there is merit and sincerity in the various charges. But hold on, there is a counter-argument. Do these distinguished figures not care a hoot about all of the people who attend the theater and just cannot hear the words? Well, Maestro Domingo is aware of it, and he has qualified his above remark. He defends the right of every attendee to hear everything and does intend to have some sort of "enhancement," if necessary, he said. And he has to accept that for reasons other than artistic. For an important legislative document, the Americans for Disabilities Act of 1990, Title III (known as the Communications Accommodations Project) requires that "places of public accommodation provide assistive [sic] listening devices...," with this one important qualification: "... unless it would constitute an ‘undue burden’ or ‘fundamental alteration’ of their services" (28 CFR.35.303(a). Such provisos always imply that one who feels denied by the lack of certain services would have to bring a legal action against the non-compliant and hope his/her rights will be upheld in court. Perhaps hoping to avoid such litigation, just about all Broadway theaters now have made available to attendees some sort of assistive listening device, mostly those wireless headphones, which pick up long-distance signals projected by a system of infra-red transmitters on stage. I find them excellent for legitimate theater, and wouldn’t think of leaving my usual collateral (driver’s license) at home when attending a dramatic play. But one simply must allow for the fact that the sound is similar to what we get from our TV sets when turned up. Those devices are not as good for a Broadway musical, unless one removes them during the progress of music. They often create a disturbing echo. And when we move back to the subject of opera, as well as symphonic/chamber music, the problem becomes much more complex. Somewhat like whispers or voice-dropping in the theater, pianissimos go unheard by attendees with hearing loss. Sung words may also be missed, though they can be a casualty even when listened to by people with normal hearing. In my case, it appears that tinnitus (a rumbling noise) and other accompanying problems have brought about steep hearing loss in the lower Hertz range. That means that male voices, not female voices (as with most others suffering such loss), become more problematic in any setting where other sounds are in play (be they piano accompaniment, full orchestral sounds or just distracting noises in a restaurant). So what solutions are there? Well, if one can afford such a device, the newest line of digital hearing aids offers marvelous improvement. At least that is the assessment of one nonagenarian who wears them all the time at concerts —Elliott Carter; he swears by them. Apparently, they are a great improvement over the old analog types that were designed simply for serviceable hearing improvement. Otherwise, for better hearing, all one can do is take a seat closer to the stage, and that procedure is not always a practical nor helpful one. (Let us forego the question of amplification in this part of the discussion.) If a music lover might be able to tolerate the imperfect impression received at a strictly instrumental concert, he cannot and should not allow his enjoyment of an event put on stage in the opera house be anything less than complete. Some opera houses, especially those without built-in amplification, do offer sound assistive devices. They may actually work for some, but the much better solution for those principally interested in the words are systems involving supertitles. Personally, I don’t enjoy looking forward, then up, then down constantly from an orchestra seat when those supertitles appear far above the stage. But that is the most common system now. Remember, they are designed not for the purpose we are addressing here but for the benefit of those who do not understand the language the piece is being sung in. When such an idea was first posed to artistic director James Levine of the Met, his reaction was immediate: "Over my dead body!" But with a little arm-twisting and salesmanship by general manager Joseph Volpe, he went along with the final plan. This would be an innovative technology in which titles would appear not somewhere out there for all to see, but on the back of every seat facing a patron. It became, in fact, an instant hit among all audiences and even a big factor in the amazing rise in attendance at the Met. This discretely private system (which also covers those open spaces, i.e., front row seats where titles are implanted into a supported rail or easel) is truly a wonderful solution. You can turn it on or off. You don’t leave the house with a stiff neck. And it can be enjoyed equally by those with hearing loss and those who simply need a personal guide through the libretto. Of course, this system is expensive and can’t be picked up by every venue comparable to the Met Opera, if indeed there are any. Some companies have been known to simply leave the lights on and let the audience follow the action with supplied libretti. That is much more common in concert halls when the lights are always left on and people can follow the words to a concert version of an opera or a choral work. We have railed before against those small auditoriums whose presenters insisted on turning out the lights even after passing out texts for no good reason other than there own misguided notion that dark is dramatic. Well, if it is, then maybe someone will come up with an invention allowing a libretto to light up in the dark without somehow disturbing anyone else in the theater. We are faced with the fact that there is no perfect solution to the problem of theatrical/musical enjoyment when hearing loss is in question. The main obstacles generally center around money or discomfort. Theaters and concert halls will have to find solutions before they find themselves in dire straits. Let’s hope we can discover the right key and that amplification doesn’t take over as the accepted necessary evil. Would you have expected people 100 years ago to go to the opera house to hear Caruso the way he sounded on records at the time? |